{"title":"Work–family conflict and happiness: the moderating role of national culture","authors":"Manli Gu, Chee Meng Tan, Yee Sen Ho, Li Liu","doi":"10.1108/ebhrm-01-2021-0001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThis study aims to demonstrate how national culture, as measured using the Hofstede’s cultural dimensions, moderates the relationship between work–family conflict (WFC) and individual-level subjective well-being (SWB).Design/methodology/approachUsing a two-level hierarchical linear model, this study analysed data from the “Family and Changing Gender Roles IV” survey from the International Social Survey Programme’s (ISSP). A total of 33,044 participants across 41 countries in 2012 were interviewed, but this investigation was limited to 23,277 individuals across 37 countries when all the necessary variables used in this analysis were accounted for. National cultural indicators (the moderators) were measured using Hofstede's cultural dimensions, which are individualism–collectivism, masculinity–femininity, uncertainty avoidance and indulgence–restraint.FindingsThis study presented two main results. Firstly, although family-to-work conflict has an overall negative impact on SWB, this negativity is stronger among participants from individualistic cultures. Secondly, just like family-to-work conflict, work-to-family interference has an adverse impact on workers’ well-being as well, though this effect is more prominent in indulgent cultures.Originality/valueThis paper is novel on two accounts. Firstly, it is one of the few articles that investigates the impact of WFC on SWB using a large multi-country dataset, which allows us to generalize results across multiple cultures. This is unlike many papers in the literature that presented findings from single-country sources, which contextualizes outcomes to a single nation. Secondly, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, the article is the first in examining the role played by the Hofstede’s indulgence–restraint dimension in moderating the effect of WFC and SWB.","PeriodicalId":51902,"journal":{"name":"Evidence-based HRM-A Global Forum for Empirical Scholarship","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence-based HRM-A Global Forum for Empirical Scholarship","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ebhrm-01-2021-0001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Business, Management and Accounting","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Abstract
PurposeThis study aims to demonstrate how national culture, as measured using the Hofstede’s cultural dimensions, moderates the relationship between work–family conflict (WFC) and individual-level subjective well-being (SWB).Design/methodology/approachUsing a two-level hierarchical linear model, this study analysed data from the “Family and Changing Gender Roles IV” survey from the International Social Survey Programme’s (ISSP). A total of 33,044 participants across 41 countries in 2012 were interviewed, but this investigation was limited to 23,277 individuals across 37 countries when all the necessary variables used in this analysis were accounted for. National cultural indicators (the moderators) were measured using Hofstede's cultural dimensions, which are individualism–collectivism, masculinity–femininity, uncertainty avoidance and indulgence–restraint.FindingsThis study presented two main results. Firstly, although family-to-work conflict has an overall negative impact on SWB, this negativity is stronger among participants from individualistic cultures. Secondly, just like family-to-work conflict, work-to-family interference has an adverse impact on workers’ well-being as well, though this effect is more prominent in indulgent cultures.Originality/valueThis paper is novel on two accounts. Firstly, it is one of the few articles that investigates the impact of WFC on SWB using a large multi-country dataset, which allows us to generalize results across multiple cultures. This is unlike many papers in the literature that presented findings from single-country sources, which contextualizes outcomes to a single nation. Secondly, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, the article is the first in examining the role played by the Hofstede’s indulgence–restraint dimension in moderating the effect of WFC and SWB.
目的本研究旨在通过Hofstede’s文化维度来考察民族文化如何调节工作家庭冲突(WFC)与个人主观幸福感(SWB)之间的关系。本研究采用两级层次线性模型,分析了来自国际社会调查计划(ISSP)的“家庭与性别角色变化IV”调查的数据。2012年,共有41个国家的33044名参与者接受了采访,但当分析中使用的所有必要变量都被考虑在内时,这次调查仅限于37个国家的23277人。国家文化指标(调节因子)使用Hofstede的文化维度进行测量,即个人主义-集体主义,男性气质-女性气质,不确定性避免和放纵-克制。研究结果本研究提出了两个主要结果。首先,尽管家庭与工作的冲突总体上对主观幸福感有负面影响,但这种负面影响在个人主义文化的参与者中更为强烈。其次,就像家庭对工作的冲突一样,工作对家庭的干扰也会对员工的幸福感产生不利影响,尽管这种影响在放纵的文化中更为突出。这篇论文的新颖之处在于两个方面。首先,这是少数几篇使用大型多国数据集研究WFC对SWB影响的文章之一,这使我们能够在多种文化中概括结果。这与文献中的许多论文不同,这些论文提出了来自单一国家的研究结果,将结果置于单一国家的背景下。其次,据作者所知,这篇文章是第一个研究Hofstede ' s indulgence-restraint维度在调节WFC和SWB效应中的作用的文章。